On 5/8/06, Nick Kew wrote:
> OK, we all know we get some embarrassing regressions in our new
> releases. PR#39490 in 1.3.35. Or 2.0.55 being effectively unusable
> in a proxy due to PR#37145. Look at the number of duplicates of
> 37145 - that's a lot of people with the confidence to report it,
> and who didn't find it 'cos it's marked as fixed (despite no fixed
> version being released until last week).
>
> We should do better than leaving the users to rediscover and deal with
> regressions themselves, once we know there's a problem. Can I suggest
> an Errata page, to list *all* known regressions in current/recent versions,
> linked from the main page alongside "Download/New Features/Changelog"?
+1
[REGRESSION] in the changelog might be good too for permanent tracking.
Most useful would be to ship a new version within a small amount of
time that corrects only regressions and has no other changes (if at
all practical; desire is to limit testing concern to speed up
delivery).